[OpenID] Fwd: Memo to OpenID: Keep it simple, please

Wed Dec 3 22:10:02 UTC 2008

This was a very good and timely story.
The message resonates load and clear and provides a decent framing of the
challenges OpenID and its community and foundation have in front of itself:

* to frame the technology as a means to an end, and to more clearly depict
what that end is and why it's good for people and the web
* to also articulate its benefits (if there are any) over technologies like
Facebook Connect
* to articulate what the OpenID brand implies, how it should be used, in
which contexts and what the trademark guidelines governing its use are
* to articulate a vision for OpenID in the marketplace, and what, if any,
new market opportunities widespread deployment of OpenID would lead to
* describe how to deploy OpenID successfully; how to educate web users on
why OpenID is beneficial to them and how to pick an OpenID provider; how to
know whether a given site supports OpenID and whether they should link one
of their existing accounts to the new site and what that means (i.e. sign in
with OpenID)
* to improve OpenID for implementations in desktop and client software; how
to make the overall OpenID experience more pleasant and natural
* to develop a narrative for the social web that pins OpenID at the center
of the continued development of applications for the open web

As for comparisons between Facebook Connect and OpenID, while the outcomes
of using either technology might be similar, or desirably similar, the fact
that Facebook Connect relies on a single, central provider necessarily
enables the kind of user experience that is simpler, is easier, is more
grokable — so long as you're a user of Facebook. But the simplicity also
removes choice, and the freedom to choose. And therefore we must
fundamentally balance the complexity that stems from such freedom with the
simplicity that comes from deciding what's best for the user, or the
individual.

Chris

On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Alexandru Popescu ☀ <
the.mindstorm.mailinglist at gmail.com> wrote:

> Don't we already have the Google and Yahoo! UX reports? Or is this
> article referring to something more than that?
>
> I haven't used yet the Facebook Connect login form, but I am really
> wondering if its simplicity is also addressing security concerns.
>
> ./alex
> --
> .w( the_mindstorm )p.
>  Alexandru Popescu
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 1:29 AM, David Recordon <drecordon at sixapart.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Memo to OpenID: Keep it simple, please
> > Webware.com 12/2/08 1:43 PM Caroline McCarthy
> >
> > With all the buzz about Facebook Connect this week, it's worth asking the
> > question: Whatever happened to OpenID?
> >
> > The universal login standard was created in 2005 by Brad Fitzpatrick,
> > founder of LiveJournal, while he was working at blog software company Six
> > Apart. (Fitzpatrick now works at Google; Six Apart has since sold
> > LiveJournal.) It has the support of Yahoo, MySpace (which just helped
> build
> > an OpenID extension for the Flock browser), and President-elect Barack
> > Obama's Change.gov. Even Google has dipped its proverbial toe in the
> pool.
> >
> > But it wasn't until Facebook Connect started making headlines that the
> > concept of data portability--a single login across multiple sites--made
> the
> > jump from the tech press to the mainstream media. OpenID, some
> speculated,
> > had been left behind in the dust.
> >
> > Hardly. But Wired's Michael Calore hit the nail on the head on Monday:
> > "Presenting a dialog that asks a user to log in to one website using a
> name
> > and password from another website is jarring, but Facebook has managed to
> > keep Facebook Connect simple enough for everyday users to understand.
> Such
> > ease of use virtually guarantees it will win support quickly."
> >
> > The truth is, the future of the "social Web" is in expansion. And
> expansion
> > invariably involves dealing with a crowd beyond the Twittering,
> > FriendFeeding, WordPressing geeks who actually understand the concept
> behind
> > data portability.
> >
> > And that's not made any easier by the fact that OpenID calls itself "an
> > open, decentralized, free framework for user-centric digital identity."
> Try
> > bringing that up in the boardroom of a non-tech company looking to ride
> the
> > social-networking wave. Then tell them that the most buzzed-about social
> > network on the planet will power your site's social features. The
> decision
> > will probably fall in the Facebook camp, unfortunately for the
> > open-standards crowd and its admirable dedication to all things balanced
> and
> > democratic.
> >
> > "Nobody should own this. Nobody's planning on making any money from
> this,"
> > Fitzpatrick has said about OpenID. "The goal is to release every part of
> > this under the most liberal licenses possible, so there's no money or
> > licensing or registering required to play. It benefits the community as a
> > whole if something like this exists, and we're all a part of the
> community."
> >
> > But your average company is probably going to care more about profit
> margins
> > than OpenID's decentralized ideal, and the possibility of having its user
> > activity broadcast across Facebook members' news feeds is tantalizing.
> > Especially during tough financial times, strategy will likely trump
> > idealism.
> >
> > That said, there are some good signs for OpenID. It has a ton of support
> in
> > the tech world, and if Facebook Connect's impending expansion goes awry
> for
> > any reason--think Beacon--it could open up a whole new set of doors for
> > OpenID. What it (and other open Web standards) needs either way is some
> > image repair.
> >
> > "Facebook is trying to replace all logins with their own, and control the
> > creation, distribution and application of the social graph using their
> > proprietary platform," Chris Saad, whose DataPortability Workgroup has
> put
> > its support behind OpenID and other open Web standards, wrote in a blog
> > post. "The most scary part of this, is that while Facebook is quietly and
> > methodically building out this vision with massive partners, the
> standards
> > community is busy squabbling about naming the open alternative."
> >
> > OpenID and its brethren could use a good, simplified marketing pitch, not
> to
> > mention some announcements and partnerships that are more prominent than
> an
> > extension for a niche Web browser. They need to use the resources that
> the
> > likes of MySpace and Yahoo can provide to get more deals going and start
> > making headlines outside of ReadWriteWeb and TechCrunch.
> >
> > And most importantly, in a recession, "it's good for the Web, so it's
> good
> > for everyone" just isn't concrete enough. One last tip for OpenID: Start
> > talking business benefits.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > general mailing list
> > general at openid.net
> > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>

-- 
Chris Messina
Citizen-Participant &
 Open Technology Advocate-at-Large
factoryjoe.com # diso-project.org
citizenagency.com # vidoop.com
This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ] private
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20081203/f7c12c77/attachment-0002.htm>